On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 23:35:39 -0400 William Conlow <wmconlow@xxxxxxxxx> allegedly wrote: > I'm a bit of a newb at this (all of it). But this email thread > (tor-talk) is completely unencrypted, right? And it has to be that > way? > It doesn't /have/ to be that way, but it is much more convenient (and useful to a much larger population) if it is structured that way. Arguably tor-talk (and/or other tor related lists) could be hosted on a hidden service, encrypyted (by a key trusted by a large group - which in itself is non-trivial to manage). But why? Usage of tor is not in itself illegal in the US (or in many other jurisdictions). Tor's designers and the relay operators (I am one) all want to see tor widely used so why hide discussion about it? Having a publicly readable archive of such discussion allows anyone interested in tor to follow earlier discussions and make up their own minds about whether they would wish to use tor. Hiding discussion would deny interested parties that right and would end up in futile "choir preaching". Best Mick --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mick Morgan gpg fingerprint: FC23 3338 F664 5E66 876B 72C0 0A1F E60B 5BAD D312 http://baldric.net ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsusbscribe or change other settings go to https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk